Skip to main content
Log in

Algebraic structure of the families of compatible frames of discernment

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

One of the major ideas of Shafer's mathematical theory of evidence is the introduction of uncertainty descriptions on different representation domains of phenomena, called families of compatible frames of discernment. Here we are going to analyze these families of frames from an algebraic point of view, study the properties of minimal refinements of collections of domains and introduce the internal operation of maximal coarsening to establish the structure of semimodular lattice. Motivated by the search for a solution of the conflict problem that arises in sensor fusion applications, we will show the connection between classical independence of frames as Boolean subalgebras and independence of frames as elements of a locally finite Birkhoff lattice. This will eventually suggest a potential algebraic solution of the conflict problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A. Beutelspacher and U. Rosenbaum, Projective Geometry (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. G. Birkhoff, Abstract linear dependence and lattices, American Journal of Mathematics 57 (1935) 800–804.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. G. Birkhoff, Lattice Theory (3rd ed.) Vol. 25 (Amer. Math. Soc. Colloquium Publications, Providence, Rhode Island, 1967).

  4. F. Cuzzolin, Visions of a generalized probability theory. PhD dissertation, Università di Padova, Dipartimento di Elettronica e Informatica (2001).

  5. F. Cuzzolin and R. Frezza, An evidential reasoning frame-work for object tracking, in: SPIE – Photonics East 99, Vol. 3840 (19–22 September 1999) pp. 13–24.

  6. F. Cuzzolin and R. Frezza, Integrating feature spaces for object tracking, in: Proc. of MTNS2000 (21–25 June 2000).

  7. A. Dempster, Upper and lower probabilities generated by a random closed interval, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 39 (1968) 957–966.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. A. Dempster, Upper and lower probabilities inferences for families of hypothesis with monotone density ratios, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 40 (1969) 953–969.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. A.P. Dempster, Upper and lower probability inferences based on a sample from a finite univariate population, Biometrika 54 (1967) 515–528.

    PubMed  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. M. Deutsch-McLeish, A study of probabilities and belief functions under conflicting evidence: Comparisons and new method, in: Proceedings of IPMU'90 (Paris, France, 2–6 July 1990) pp. 41–49.

  11. I.R. Goodman and H.T. Nguyen, Uncertainty Models for Knowledge-Based Systems (North Holland, New York, 1985).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. J. Goutsias, R.P. Mahler and H.T. Nguyen, Random sets: theory and applications, in: IMA Volumes in Mathematics and Its Applications, Vol. 97 (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, December 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  13. N. Jacobson, Basic Algebra I (Freeman, New York, 1985).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. J. Kohlas and Monney P.-A., A Mathematical Theory of Hints – An Approach to the Dempster–Shafer Theory of Evidence. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, (Springer, 1995).

  15. G. Matheron, Random Sets and Integral Geometry, Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics.

  16. C.K. Murphy, Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts, Decision Support Systems 29 (2000) 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. H. Nguyen, On random sets and belief functions, J. Mathematical Analysis and Applications 65 (1978) 531–542.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. H. Nguyen and T. Wang, Belief functions and random sets, in: Applications and Theory of Random Sets, The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 97 (Springer, 1997) pp. 243–255.

  19. J.G. Oxley, Matroid Theory (Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, UK, 1992).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. K.I. Rosenthal, Quantales and Their Applications (Longman scientific and technical, Longman house, Burnt Mill, Harlow, Essex, UK, 1990).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence (Princeton University Press, 1976).

  22. G. Shafer, P.P. Shenoy and K. Mellouli, Propagating belief functions in qualitative Markov trees, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 1(4) (1987) 349–400.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. R. Sikorski, Boolean Algebras (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1964).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. P. Smets, The transferable belief model and random sets, International Journal of Intelligent Systems 7 (1992) 37–46.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. M. Stern, Semimodular Lattices (Cambridge University Press, 1999).

  26. G. Szasz, Introduction to Lattice Theory (Academic, New York, 1963).

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. Whitney, On the abstract properties of linear dependence, American Journal of Mathematics 57 (1935) 509–533.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fabio Cuzzolin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cuzzolin, F. Algebraic structure of the families of compatible frames of discernment. Ann Math Artif Intell 45, 241–274 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-005-9010-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-005-9010-1

Keywords

AMS subject classification (2000)

Navigation